Digg/Buzz It Up

POLITICO 44

Some of the of biggest special interest groups in Washington are expected to take full advantage of a Supreme Court decision Thursday enabling them to spend millions on attack ads in the 2010 midterm elections, even as the Obama administration and congressional Democrats scramble to close the gaping holes the ruling carved into campaign finance rules.

Thursday’s highly anticipated 5-4 decision in a case brought by the conservative nonprofit group Citizens United reversed decades of law restricting corporations and unions from spending their general funds on ads supporting or opposing candidates. And it left liberals and advocates for stricter campaign finance rules predicting an explosion of corporate-funded ads attacking Democrats.

“We are moving to an age where we won’t have the senator from Arkansas or the congressman from North Carolina, but the senator from Wal-Mart and the congressman from Bank of America,” said Melanie Sloan, executive director of the left-leaning watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

Campaign strategists and lawyers who advise corporations, unions and independent political groups on political spending also predicted a surge in ads as a result of the decision.

Ads like those aired by Swift Boat Veterans for Truth attacking 2004 Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry can now be paid for more directly by for-profit or nonprofit corporations or trade groups.

In place of 527s, Ginsberg predicted an expanded role for groups set up under sections 501(c)4 and 501(c)6 of the Internal Revenue Service code, which he said require “meager disclosure requirements of their donors.”

Ginsberg also predicted the decision would be good for consultants who advise outside groups on their spending and media strategies. One Democratic consultant professed to making “tons of sales calls” after the decision, calling it an “economic recovery package” for consultants.

What many strategists and lawyers said they don’t expect to see is American International Group spending millions on ads attacking congressmen who criticized its bonuses or medical firms seeking vengeance on President Barack Obama for pushing to overhaul the nation’s health care system.

Instead, they think deep-pocketed companies seeking to target Obama or congressional Democrats will funnel their cash to existing or yet-to-be-created coalitions — such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Rifle Association, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America or the National Association of Manufacturers — that are expected to take advantage of the new spending flexibility provided by the ruling.

In recent years, shareholders have independently challenged executives to disclose, explain and justify their participation in partisan politics. For now, that mostly includes making political donations. The scrutiny would intensify significantly if it also meant paid television advertising.

Most corporate leaders of publicly held firms long ago grew leery of playing in politics in a big way lest they put off customers, though the Chamber and other umbrella groups could shield some businesses from exposure by pooling money and taking full credit or blame for how it is spent.

At the same time, campaign finance experts expect there will be some privately held firms with ideological bents that now will engage more directly in campaigns.

“The greatest opportunity for money to flow is corporations giving to trade associations and advocacy groups to have them air the ads,” said Michael Toner, a former Federal Election Commission chairman who advises Republican committees and candidates on campaign finance laws. “They’re the ones that could really benefit from this. The key will be how much money can they amass, and how much are they willing to spend?”

Readers' Comments (370)

The wording in the bill says two or more people are considered a corporation. So with this new ruling allows small groups of people to give as they feel free to give, which in turn makes the Progressive/liberals mad. This gives small business's a voice, which the Feingold-mccain bill took away. Look to who this angers the most it will be the progressive/liberals that are running scared of this ruling. As a small business owner I can now invest with my voice, and a few dollars. I no longer give to a party, I give just to individuals, I want to see elected!

Thursday’s highly anticipated 5-4 decision in a case brought by the conservative nonprofit group Citizens United reversed decades of law restricting corporations and unions from spending their general funds on ads supporting or opposing candidates. And it left liberals and advocates for stricter campaign finance rules predicting an explosion of corporate-funded ads attacking Democrats.

Thanks to SCOTUS, the political playing field has just been leveled. The Dems will not be able to compete.

The last thing the Dems need now are attack ads pointing out their faults & failures. This will surely lead to their demise.

Good decision, corporatons have enormous influence in our lives. The provide is with jobs, investments and great lifestyles. They should have first amensment rights. It will make this year very interesting. The new populist battle Obama is planning against the "evil corporation" will not be onesided. Nobody was complaining when unions hugely influenced the last election, transporting people in and giving them free cigarrettes to vote. I always felt the campain laws severely disadvantaged Republicans.

Good decision, corporatons have enormous influence in our lives. The provide is with jobs, investments and great lifestyles. They should have first amensment rights. It will make this year very interesting. The new populist battle Obama is planning against the "evil corporation" will not be onesided. Nobody was complaining when unions hugely influenced the last election, transporting people in and giving them free cigarrettes to vote. I always felt the campain laws severely disadvantaged Republicans.

The union, SEIU, bought $685,000 worth of ads and slammed Brown. How was this not illegal?

Clearly the unions have freedom of speech, but a conservative group does not.

This is exactly why it is the Dems that are scrambling. They have for years allowed the unions to play a big part in elections, but have also been successful in blocking conservative groups from getting involved.

Dems just don't get the Constitution. Freedom of Speech. The Liberal Left thinks it's some ancient document they can re-write with their own rules. The Supreme Court seems to think otherwise and Obama couldn't get enough new justices in to change up the court to the Left quick enough.

Corporations now can focus on getting the lefties out, getting tax cuts in and creating jobs for a stronger pro business America. Something Obama doesn't get.

This is going to get interesting! There are so many businesses that have remained neutral in order to NOT offend their customers that may rethink their stance. With Obama attacking most of the private sector and the MSM reporting it like the weather, advertisement by those being attacked could tank this administration rapidly... please.

If you have any doubt that God looks over America, you need only consider this week's events - the miracle in Massachusetts, home of the Tea Party, and this reaffirmation of the freedom of speech. The latter is particularly interesting from both a Constitutional and a political viewpoint. With regard to the Constitution, it reaffirms the right for any association of people to speak their views - including a business association. Think for a minute if it makes sense for AARP or ACORN, both of which operate as businesses, to invest in political discussion while others like Ford Motor Co., Apple, UnitedHealthcare, or Walmart may not. Doesn't Ford have a right to complain about their two primary domestic competitors being given government largesse? Doesn't Apple have a right to weigh in on net neutrality or protection of intellectual property? Doesn't UnitedHealthcare have the right to its views on Obamacare? And doesn't the nation's largest employer have the right to provide its views on what might help our economic recovery? One could assert that corporations are subject to taxes and, therefore, should have the right to representation. Finally, as the Justices wrote, freedom of speech also means the freedom to be able to hear all the opinions, with none subject to censorship.

On the political front, the divine justice is that the business-basher Obama now has to face the music of his continued attempts to make American capitalism the bogeyman for this recession and all other economic evils. The bogeymen can now fight back - the banks, the insurance companies, the energy companies, and medical companies. Its easy to pick on the defenseless. Now let's see if Obama's new populist strategy comes with a blow-back for the November elections.

In my opinion, the only reason Democrats are squealing is because they seemed to have an advantage under the previous ruling. In general, corporate America and private business men and women are not stupid enough to take-on divisive political causes or sponsor single party candidates at the expense of profits. That level of corruption of the political system is only envisioned and highlighted by those already benefiting from it; i.e., Democrats in this case.

Funny that Senator Schumer is pushing the idea of requiring a shareholder's vote before a corporation can donate, but he does not consider the concept can equally apply to union members. Perhaps he thinks blue collar workers are too stupid to tell the union bosses what to do with fees allocated to political causes and candidates?

Personally I am in favor of public financing. No one takes any money from anyone else. However that is not the case and once again you see the hypocrisy, and double standard from the Democrats. You see prior to the ruling things were in the Democrats favor since Unions were allowed to pump 100s of million $$$$ into their political campaigns and attacking their opponents. Now with the ruling it has become a level playing field. I don't understand how one could be a registered Democrat. It really baffles me. I can't imagine someone can be so bereft of intelligence, rationale, reasoning, honesty, and awareness. I

The Democrat party manipulated the game at every turn in Massachusetts. They thought they "owned" Kennedy's seat. Their slogan can always be best summed up as , "We're losing -- LET'S CHANGE THE RULES." How fitting it is indeed that the Supreme Court , not a political party, has leveled the field. The Dems will never learn that manipulation is not appreciated. They can't. It's a core principle.

Dems just don't get the Constitution. Freedom of Speech. The Liberal Left thinks it's some ancient document they can re-write with their own rules. The Supreme Court seems to think otherwise and Obama couldn't get enough new justices in to change up the court to the Left quick enough.

I HAVE NEVER AGREED WITH HOSPICE FOR LOVE ONES HOWEVER THIS MOVE THAT THE BOOT STRAP MAN AND HIS STALE CRONIES IS TRYING TO PULL ON THE CONSTITUTION PUT THEM OUT TO PASTURE. IT WON'T BE LONG FOR THEM ANYHOW. THEY ARE SWORN TO BE IMPARTIAL BUT THEY ARE REPUBLICANS THAT HATE OUR PRESIDENT AND THIS IS THE SOLE REASON FOR THIS BEFORE PRESIDENT OBAMA STATES ADDRESS. NO ONE FOOLS WE THE PEOPLE. WE WILL CAMPAIGN AGAINST THIS MOVE. THE BIG CONGLAMORATES HAS AREADY RAPE US CLEAN. TOOK OUR MONEY AND WON'T GIVE US LOANS TO SAVE HOMES. TOOK OUR JOBS AND NOW TRYING TO TAKE HEALTH CARE REFORM. TELL ME HAS THIS WORLD GONE CRAZY. I THINK SO.

sorry you must be high...this gives big biz the right to choose or rally against a person with out any problems..in simple terms..they can campaign against an individual with unlimited funding..basically buying a vote...way to go Supreme Court Justices

Another win for Corporate America, boy theres a shock. The SCOTUS has just sold out the country to whatever big business whats to do to us. All you cons that are afraid of big government who you could at least vote in and out of office have now been stripped of a right, because our vote/wishes are gonna mean bupkis. The winner of an election will now be whomever Corporate America wants it to be.

It should be a well known fact that big company's lean to the right which no doubt level the playing field on contributions to the political partys. The unions have been dying a slow death until the present Socialist White House moved in. Did you notice that SEIC visited the White House more than anyone else. Obama showed his bias when he gave a pass on unions paying the tax on Cadillac health plans. Mean while the rest of us poor non-union workers would have had to pay for them. Thank you Mr. Brown, you sent them scrambling with your win and then the Court gave them a second blow to finish them off. Some things are meant to be, Maybe Obama and his 30 plus radical Czar's will get the message, I really doubt it though.